The left has done more damage to the social and so-called pure sciences than the right. While the right may believe in things like creationism and reject climate change, those ideas do not hurt scientific research. So says John Tierney inCityJournal.org:

Democrats outnumber Republicans at least 12 to 1 (perhaps 40 to 1) in social psychology, creating what Jonathan Haidt calls a “tribal-moral community” with its own “sacred values” about what’s worth studying and what’s taboo. – snip –

The Left’s most rigid taboos involve the biology of race and gender, as the Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker chronicles in The Blank Slate. The book takes its title from Pinker’s term for the dogma that “any differences we see among races, ethnic groups, sexes, and individuals come not from differences in their innate constitution but from differences in their experiences.” The dogma constricts researchers’ perspective—“No biology, please, we’re social scientists”—and discourages debate, in and out of academia. Early researchers in sociobiology faced vitriolic attacks from prominent scientists like Stephen Jay Gould, who accused them of racism and sexism for studying genetic influences on behavior.

Which side cries out that ‘the science is settled’? Which side will march you off campus for suggesting that there might be innate differences in skill levels in men versus women. Ask Lawrence Summers:

Former Harvard president Lawrence Summers found this out the hard way at an academic conference where he dared to discuss the preponderance of men among professors of mathematics and physical sciences at elite universities.

While acknowledging that women faced cultural barriers, like discrimination and the pressures of family responsibilities, Summers hypothesized that there might be other factors, too, such as the greater number of men at the extreme high end in tests measuring mathematical ability and other traits. Males’ greater variability in aptitude is well established—it’s why there are more male dunces as well as geniuses—but scientific accuracy was no defense against the feminist outcry. The controversy forced Summers to apologize and ultimately contributed to his resignation.

I believe in God, and science. I figure one created the other, but your experience with it all might be different. I also believe in healthy debate, interesting discussions and probing scientific and social science research. When the left is in charge, all those things become harder.

One Response to But We Knew This

Neuro-economics is the study of how the brain works as a neurological system with various inputs feom economic theory. The talk I heard on it sounded like they didn’t really find much use is psychology or sociology in the field. The tribalism is probably why.
There are steady state believers out there, but for the most part the right does believe in climate change. More than anything we simply don’t believe a few parts per million of co2 which was quite higher back in dinosaur days is going to turn the ocean into carbonic acid, raise the earth’s temperature 50 degrees, and steal your left sock while you sleep. Like a certain Hillary fan who though this change would cut his life short by 40 years.